Property talk:P937
Documentation
location where persons or organisations were actively participating in employment, business or other work
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P937#Type Q5, Q95074, Q16334295, Q1747829, Q21070568, Q14514600, Q4271324, Q192581, Q13002315, Q4164871, Q1047113, Q28640, Q228534, Q43229, SPARQL
if [item A] has this property (work location (P937)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P937#Contemporary, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P937#Value type Q17334923, Q3895768, Q3114762, Q516239, Q1229765, Q6256, Q515, Q2221906, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P937#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P937#Scope, SPARQL
(Help)
Violations query:
SELECT ?item { ?item wdt:P937 wd:Q2. ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5. }
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P937#Not world value
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Untitled edit
should be used for all persons, group of persons, family, list of persons:
e.g. House of Este (Q677173) work location (P937) Este (Q34607)--Oursana (talk) 12:37, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
- list of the bishops of Padua (Q1837310) work location (P937) Padua (Q617) --Oursana (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- I removed the mention the restriction to artists or creator in the English and French description. That does not have any use. Other languages should be changed too. --Zolo (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- I used it on "Jack the Ripper" .. somehow this seems odd. --- Jura 19:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
inverse edit
"location where objects were active" <-> "active objects (for this location)"? --Fractaler (talk) 13:49, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
jobs and positions edit
This property is meanwhile also used to indicate the work location of a job or position, e.g. librarian (Q182436)work location (P937)library (Q7075). This has a slightly different meaning than the originally proposed one to indicate the specific work location of a specific person. Should we extend the scope or delete those statements? --Pasleim (talk) 20:21, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Pasleim: extension is quite natural, please keep info d1g (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment this seems to mess up the constraint and the initial definition. > del
--- Jura 08:31, 1 October 2017 (UTC) - I agree with Jura1 (talk • contribs • logs). Also, this sort of expansion can be dangerous, leading to situations like Marian the librarian working not in the library in River City, but in library. Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 15:27, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- In the meantime, I like the approach librarian (Q182436) uses (P2283) library (Q7075) qualified with object has role (P3831) workplace (Q628858)
--- Jura 18:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
located in the administrative territorial entity edit
Requiring objects to be located in an administrative territorial entity seems bad. E.g., some people work at sea or Antarctica, like Louis Bernacchi (Q19999). Ghouston (talk) 02:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- Can we have instead an object constraint for class physical location (Q17334923)? Ghouston (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- May be it's better. See also this discussion: Property talk:P131#City: ATE or not ATE. --Infovarius (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- I can't even put Egypt (Q79) as a work location without the warning. OK, I'll change it. Ghouston (talk) 02:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- Let's try "instance or subclass of location". Ghouston (talk) 03:02, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- May be it's better. See also this discussion: Property talk:P131#City: ATE or not ATE. --Infovarius (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
schools and such edit
Currently we have a constraint error when using a school, university or similar (including hospitals...) as 'workplace', because they are not considered as physical places. A workaround I have found is to state the school / university, etc. as the employer. However this is a bit unintuitive in some cases and even sometimes just wrong. In many countries people working in some public institutions are not considered employed by the institution ; their employer is the State, and the school / university / hospital, etc. is usually considerd as their workplace. I think a change should be introduced here. CaféBuzz (talk) 17:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
- I can only agree with that. It should be possible for a professor to specify the university as their P937. Jan Mathys (talk) 17:11, 18 January 2024 (UTC)